PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS

[hilariousandco-rapped]

PoS mining is vulnerable to many attacks and cannot be scaled the way that PoW can be. I would like to know why so many people are advocating for Bitcoin to stop using PoW mining and to switch to PoS.

PoW is by far more secure, the level of security will increase as the value of Bitcoin increases as people will want to mine with more powerful miners. It is also not possible to fake PoW.

Did you not read my whitepaper?

-Satoshi

[1714607994]

1714607994

[1714607994]

1714607994

[1714607994]

1714607994

[kokojie]

If you reverse PoS and PoW in your post, then your post would be 100% accurate and correct

[Kimowa]

If you reverse PoS and PoW in your post, then your post would be 100% accurate and correct

Doesn't it cost nothing to attack a PoS coin? While you must use actual resources to attempt to attack a PoW coin?

[bornil267645]

If you reverse PoS and PoW in your post, then your post would be 100% accurate and correct

Doesn't it cost nothing to attack a PoS coin? While you must use actual resources to attempt to attack a PoW coin?

Exactly, I thought attacking PoS coin is much more cost free (next to nothing) than attacking PoW coin.

[Soros Shorts]

Some people are not happy that ASIC manufacturers have some power over the system and are able to use their technical skills to enrich themselves while providing the technology to help secure the network. They'd rather go with the current banking model where all the power is held by the stakeholders.

[devphp]

Doesn't it cost nothing to attack a PoS coin? While you must use actual resources to attempt to attack a PoW coin?

Exactly, I thought attacking PoS coin is much more cost free (next to nothing) than attacking PoW coin.

You guys are both brainwashed, sorry to have to say this. Either that, or you're miners/early bitcoin adopters.

[achimsmile]

If you reverse PoS and PoW in your post, then your post would be 100% accurate and correct

Doesn't it cost nothing to attack a PoS coin? While you must use actual resources to attempt to attack a PoW coin?

Exactly, I thought attacking PoS coin is much more cost free (next to nothing) than attacking PoW coin.

You just have to buy 51% of the currency or track down majority of stakeholders and compromise their private keys. Much cost free

[jsgayo]

Some people think that POS is to save energy and more environmentally friendly. In fact, POW consistent with the principles of input and output.

[achimsmile]

Some people think that POS is to save energy and more environmentally friendly. In fact, POW consistent with the principles of input and output.

that's right, in PoW the input is energy, the output is heat (and hashes)

[Fernandez]

If you reverse PoS and PoW in your post, then your post would be 100% accurate and correct

 

I see a lot of misunderstanding, which stems from a fear of the unknown. Once these realize how much Bitcoin is centralized and is controlled by the Cartel, and that they are paying a tax for the privilege, they will start seeing the merits of PoS.

The current PoS schemes are a far cry from what Sunny King came up with, and there will be no doubt better implementations in the future.

[Elwar]

There is a false perception that somehow bitcoin price goes down by the cost of electricity needed for PoW.

Also...Global warming whackos.

[kokojie]

There is a false perception that somehow bitcoin price goes down by the cost of electricity needed for PoW.

Also...Global warming whackos.

um, if Bitcoin eco-system isn't paying for the electricity, then who is? Also, it's not limited to the electricity, Bitcoin eco-system is also paying for the hardware, pool fee and miner profits.

If Bitcoin eco-system pays these expenses, then it's value transferred out of the system, of course Bitcoin price will go down. Unless there's new money inflow to equalize it.

[kokojie]

If you reverse PoS and PoW in your post, then your post would be 100% accurate and correct

Doesn't it cost nothing to attack a PoS coin? While you must use actual resources to attempt to attack a PoW coin?

Nope, just the contrary. In a PoW system, once you own the hardware, it cost nearly nothing to attack any eco-system that uses the same algorithm. As shown by many PoW altcoins attacked to death.

In a PoS system, acquiring enough stake to attack will cost you astronomical amount of money, (you can't really hack the stake, since it's illegitimate stake and can be rolled back by community action). Then once you acquire the stake, you could only attack one particular PoS system (which you own a majority stake in, why would you attack it? it's illogical).

Therefore, ZERO PoS system has been actually attacked so far.

I'm not sure why people ignore the fact that tons of PoW altcoin has been attacked, and ZERO PoS altcoin attacked so far, and still have the audacity to claim PoS is less secure.

[kodtycoon]

If you reverse PoS and PoW in your post, then your post would be 100% accurate and correct

Doesn't it cost nothing to attack a PoS coin? While you must use actual resources to attempt to attack a PoW coin?

Exactly, I thought attacking PoS coin is much more cost free (next to nothing) than attacking PoW coin.

if this is the case, why is a possible threatening technology being allowed to flourish? why not just use these attacks to eradicate the crypto world of this oh so horrible pos? if its that damn free/cheap to attack pos then why the hell doesnt everyone who hates pos so much just attack it and get it over with?

oh wait.. its all complete bollox.. sorry..

[DumbFruit]

(you can't really hack the stake, since it's illegitimate stake and can be rolled back by community action).

Oh the beauty of PoS decentralized consensus.

[Elwar]

There is a false perception that somehow bitcoin price goes down by the cost of electricity needed for PoW.

Also...Global warming whackos.

um, if Bitcoin eco-system isn't paying for the electricity, then who is? Also, it's not limited to the electricity, Bitcoin eco-system is also paying for the hardware, pool fee and miner profits.

If Bitcoin eco-system pays these expenses, then it's value transferred out of the system, of course Bitcoin price will go down. Unless there's new money inflow to equalize it.

There is a hard limit on the amount of money the Bitcoin economy can lose via mining expenses. Currently that is 25 bitcoins every 10 minutes. That is the max.

If electricity and hardware costs double....people will not need to open their cold storage wallets to subsidize the cost.

[kokojie]

There is a false perception that somehow bitcoin price goes down by the cost of electricity needed for PoW.

Also...Global warming whackos.

um, if Bitcoin eco-system isn't paying for the electricity, then who is? Also, it's not limited to the electricity, Bitcoin eco-system is also paying for the hardware, pool fee and miner profits.

If Bitcoin eco-system pays these expenses, then it's value transferred out of the system, of course Bitcoin price will go down. Unless there's new money inflow to equalize it.

There is a hard limit on the amount of money the Bitcoin economy can lose via mining expenses. Currently that is 25 bitcoins every 10 minutes. That is the max.

If electricity and hardware costs double....people will not need to open their cold storage wallets to subsidize the cost.

Not really, you are confusing coin supply with paying for mining expense. If your theory were true, then when coin supply go to 0, mining expense will also be 0? that's obviously not the case, therefore your theory is wrong.

The expense is charged by devaluing Bitcoin, so no one will need to break out their cold storage, the expense is charged by making the coin's value decrease, that's all. As long as there's a need to use PoW to secure the network, Bitcoin eco-system will have to pay an expense tax to the miners, and that tax can not be cheap.

[DumbFruit]

Not really, you are confusing coin supply with paying for mining expense. If your theory were true, then when coin supply go to 0, mining expense will also be 0? that's obviously not the case, therefore your theory is wrong.

This in an example of an argument from incredulity. The developers have been discussing for a long time how hash rates are going to stay up once inflation falls to zero.

I don't think hashing would fall to zero, because people will pay for transactions, and there will be competition to be the agency that is supplying that, but without inflation it will definitely atrophy considerably.

[BombaUcigasa]

Stupid people do not see the disconnect between quantity and value.

This happens for:
- salaries
- pensions
- interest
- dividends
- stocks
- prices

They perceive the world through a single coordinate, the measure of quantity as being the only indicator of worth.

In short, Piece-of-Shit supporters believe that they can get some coins, hold them, multiply them and then sell them for profit and somehow generate value by doing nothing. This being also pegged against bitcoin, for which they obtain value through price increase by doing nothing.

It doesn't work, the cost to secure a coin is the cost to secure a coin. Between the two costs, PoW is better because:
- nobody can fork the past in PoW
- nobody can derail the network for more than a few hours in PoW
- nobody can steal your coins, at most they can steal one transaction in PoW
- nobody gets something for doing nothing in PoW

[Buffer Overflow]

In a PoS system, acquiring enough stake to attack will cost you astronomical amount of money

Well it didn't cost the government an astronomical amount to obtain those massive amount of bitcoins from the silk road bust.
Lucky bitcoin isn't POS or it'll be screwed.